Does Onboard Sound Stress The CPU?

[Connor]

I did not install my SBLive 5.1 when I got the p4p800 deluxe figuring
the onboard sound should be good enough. I've read in one thread here
that the onboard sound 'stresses' the cpu. Jumping from my old p3
1gig system to a p4 3gig certainly sped things up, but since I have
the spare sound card, would it benifit me in anyway to install it?
The only card I have in the mobo is the video card.
Thanks for any insight.

 

[m.marien]

I did not install my SBLive 5.1 when I got the p4p800 deluxe figuring
the onboard sound should be good enough. I've read in one thread here
that the onboard sound 'stresses' the cpu. Jumping from my old p3
1gig system to a p4 3gig certainly sped things up, but since I have
the spare sound card, would it benifit me in anyway to install it?
The only card I have in the mobo is the video card.
Thanks for any insight.

Interesting question. I have a K8V with onboard sound, WinXP and all the
updates. Without the media player running, the CPU performance is at 0%,
When I open the media player with ambience it jumps to 35% usage. When I
minimize the media player but leave it running, it drops to 2%. IMHO I think
it might stress a P4, but my AMD64 seems to handle onboard sound OK.

 

[Phil]

I did not install my SBLive 5.1 when I got the p4p800 deluxe figuring
the onboard sound should be good enough. I've read in one thread here
that the onboard sound 'stresses' the cpu. Jumping from my old p3
1gig system to a p4 3gig certainly sped things up, but since I have
the spare sound card, would it benifit me in anyway to install it?
The only card I have in the mobo is the video card.
Thanks for any insight.

In my experience a SBLive 5.1 is a good step up from onboard sound, with my
A7N8X-X (realtek 5.1) I noticed a 4-5 degree increase in CPU temperature,
and sometimes under heavy load the audio would studder.
I then upgraded to a SBLive 5.1 and it was a decent step up: S/PDIF, EAX etc
etc.

I would recommend that if you already have the card to disable the onboard
sound and stick it in now.

 

[Anon]

It does not "stress" the CPU on my system. I have a P4C800-E with P4c 3.2MHz
CPU over clocked to 3.52MHz. I use the onboard sound.

With Media Player playing a MP3 file, the CPU Usage (as reported by Windows
Task Manager) is between 0% and 2%. On the Processes tab, it reports
wmplayer.exe using between 0% and 1%. This certainly is not "stressing" the
CPU.

You might get better sound using the SBLive 5.1, but you won't lower CPU
usage. In fact, the SBLive will probably have higher CPU usage than the
onboard sound.

Al

 

[DaveW]

You should always use a soundcard if poosible, to remove the audio load from
the CPU.

 

[m.marien]

You should always use a soundcard if poosible, to remove the audio load from
the CPU.

And that works how ? Both have drivers that you have to install. Both
require CPU cycles to work. From the experience of the two people that
tested the onboard sound here, it didn't stress their CPU's all that much
(2%).

 

[Connor]

And that works how ? Both have drivers that you have to install. Both
require CPU cycles to work. From the experience of the two people that
tested the onboard sound here, it didn't stress their CPU's all that much
(2%).

Based upon the answers I've gotten and my own tests agreeing with the
1%-2% cpu load, (even less when wmp is minimized playing an mp3), it
doesnt seem to make much difference. If I decide, it'll be based on
the sound quality between the two.
Thanks for all your opinions.

 

[Tim]

No. The graphics from modern media players might create some load as
reported by others, particularly on a system with a downlevel graphics card
IE PCI.
- Tim

 

[Rob Stow]

Based upon the answers I've gotten and my own tests agreeing with the
1%-2% cpu load, (even less when wmp is minimized playing an mp3), it
doesnt seem to make much difference. If I decide, it'll be based on
the sound quality between the two.
Thanks for all your opinions.

Quickie test with an Athlon XP2400+ on an nForce motherboard.
Winamp 5 playing the same MP3, all visual effects turned off:
1.) Using soundchip integrated on the motherboard: 1 to 2 %.
2.) Using Creative SoundBlaster Audigy 2 Platinum: 3 to 5 %

Both on W2K SP4 with the latest nForce all-in-one
drivers and the latest Audigy 2 drivers.

The Audigy does sound better, however. Or have I merely
convinced myself that it must after shelling out $60 (used)
for it ? Close call. ;-)

 

[sbb78247]

Quickie test with an Athlon XP2400+ on an nForce motherboard.
Winamp 5 playing the same MP3, all visual effects turned off:
1.) Using soundchip integrated on the motherboard: 1 to 2 %.
2.) Using Creative SoundBlaster Audigy 2 Platinum: 3 to 5 %

Both on W2K SP4 with the latest nForce all-in-one
drivers and the latest Audigy 2 drivers.

The Audigy does sound better, however. Or have I merely
convinced myself that it must after shelling out $60 (used)
for it ? Close call. ;-)

Not really.

I run a SB Live Value in a MSI board with a Celery 2.4 and regardless of the
tax on the CPU, it blows the onboard into the weeds! It has pretty much the
same onboard as the Asus P4PE and the P4p800 that i run now at home and the
difference in sound quality is night and day. Stay with the SB and don't
look back.

Shannon

 

[Kylesb]

To the OP:

The best test, an oldie but goodie, is the Audiobench test that is
part of the winbench99 test suite. Audiobench will give you lots of
data on CPU load for various sound streaming scenarios. My SBLive ate
about 12-15% CPU under worst conditions, my Nforce2 Soundstorm/Dolby
chipset (onboard A7n8x-dlx) uses less about 5-6% under worst
conditions (hi quality stereo test), please note I'm pulling these
numbers out of the cobwebs of my memory, and they may not be totally
accurate, but relatively accurate.

The sound quality of the SBLive is most assuredly better than most
onboard solutions, with perhaps the exception of the Nforce2 MCPT
chipset, imho.

However, if you are satisfied with the sound quality of the onboard
sound, then don't bother with the SBLive, as Creative's drivers can
create plenty of load on the CPU during gaming.

 

[Darkfalz]

I did not install my SBLive 5.1 when I got the p4p800 deluxe figuring
the onboard sound should be good enough. I've read in one thread here
that the onboard sound 'stresses' the cpu. Jumping from my old p3
1gig system to a p4 3gig certainly sped things up, but since I have
the spare sound card, would it benifit me in anyway to install it?
The only card I have in the mobo is the video card.
Thanks for any insight.

A SBLive has an onboard SPU roughly equivalent to about a Pentium 60.
Consider how much of a dent that's going to make in your Pentium 4 3000 MHz.

Not very much.

So yes, it takes up a bit of CPU but nothing significant. Lives were also
notorious PCI bandwidth hogs, although I hear Audigy's don't have the same
problem.

Also remember a good deal of the 3D sound calculations have to take place on
the main CPU anyway because they are part of the game engine, so no
accelerated sound card will be free of a performance hit. In benchmarks, the
difference between using the onboard sound vs an Audigy 2 is usually 2-3% at
most.

The Audigy probably sounds slightly better though, if you have the ears and
the speakers to appreciate it.

 

[Darkfalz]

Interesting question. I have a K8V with onboard sound, WinXP and all the
updates. Without the media player running, the CPU performance is at 0%,
When I open the media player with ambience it jumps to 35% usage. When I
minimize the media player but leave it running, it drops to 2%. IMHO I think
it might stress a P4, but my AMD64 seems to handle onboard sound OK.

LOL in your dreams.

 

[Darkfalz]

It does not "stress" the CPU on my system. I have a P4C800-E with P4c 3.2MHz
CPU over clocked to 3.52MHz. I use the onboard sound.

With Media Player playing a MP3 file, the CPU Usage (as reported by Windows
Task Manager) is between 0% and 2%. On the Processes tab, it reports
wmplayer.exe using between 0% and 1%. This certainly is not "stressing" the
CPU.

You might get better sound using the SBLive 5.1, but you won't lower CPU
usage. In fact, the SBLive will probably have higher CPU usage than the
onboard sound.

Why would you care about CPU usage to play an mp3?

The only time it matters is in games, when the CPU has other stuff to do.

 

[Rob Stow]

Why would you care about CPU usage to play an mp3?

The only time it matters is in games, when the CPU has other stuff to do.

LOL !

Games are not the only time "when the CPU has other stuff to do."

Some of us occasionally do things other than play games - and we
might like to have an MP3 playing while we do those things.

 

[m.marien]

I did not install my SBLive 5.1 when I got the p4p800 deluxe figuring
the onboard sound should be good enough. I've read in one thread here
that the onboard sound 'stresses' the cpu. Jumping from my old p3
1gig system to a p4 3gig certainly sped things up, but since I have
the spare sound card, would it benifit me in anyway to install it?
The only card I have in the mobo is the video card.
Thanks for any insight.

So if you read all the posts to this thread, the only thing stressed is the
truth in that other thread.

 

[Darkfalz]

LOL !

Games are not the only time "when the CPU has other stuff to do."

Some of us occasionally do things other than play games - and we
might like to have an MP3 playing while we do those things.

Yep I bet your web browser and word processor chews up so many cycles!

 

[Rob Stow]

Yep I bet your web browser and word processor chews up so many cycles!

Even at home in the evenings and just having a dozen apps open and
all churning away at there own little jobs makes it easy to keep my
little XP2400+ running at 100%. I typically have to give WinAmp
"high" or "realtime" priority and drop the priority on most other
things down a notch or two just so that WinAmp gets the cpu attention
it needs to avoid jerky playback. Heck, right now I only have Thunderbird,
XNews, TMPEGEnc, and WinAmp running and my XP2400+ is running at 100%
and will stay that way at least until the video I am reencoding is
done - in another 193 minutes.

And actually, I don't have a word processor - I just use the
editor in the IDE for whatever compiler I happen to have open.
Compiling apps and doing a little related database work can very
easily leave WinAmp starved for cpu cycles - on a 1.8 GHz Opteron
dualie. I also know a few people who do CAD work who find it very
difficult to get decent audio playback while they work - even though
they typically have a fast Xeon or Opteron dualie.

Who has got cpu cycles left for games ?

 

[Kylesb]

| Even at home in the evenings and just having a dozen apps open and
| all churning away at there own little jobs makes it easy to keep my
| little XP2400+ running at 100%. I typically have to give WinAmp
| "high" or "realtime" priority and drop the priority on most other
| things down a notch or two just so that WinAmp gets the cpu
attention
| it needs to avoid jerky playback. Heck, right now I only have
Thunderbird,
| XNews, TMPEGEnc, and WinAmp running and my XP2400+ is running at
100%
| and will stay that way at least until the video I am reencoding is
| done - in another 193 minutes.
|
| And actually, I don't have a word processor - I just use the
| editor in the IDE for whatever compiler I happen to have open.
| Compiling apps and doing a little related database work can very
| easily leave WinAmp starved for cpu cycles - on a 1.8 GHz Opteron
| dualie. I also know a few people who do CAD work who find it very
| difficult to get decent audio playback while they work - even though
| they typically have a fast Xeon or Opteron dualie.
|
| Who has got cpu cycles left for games ?


You're one brave puppy to change priority for any application to
"realtime" as this may crash your OS.

 

[m.marien]

| Even at home in the evenings and just having a dozen apps open and
| all churning away at there own little jobs makes it easy to keep my
| little XP2400+ running at 100%. I typically have to give WinAmp
| "high" or "realtime" priority and drop the priority on most other
| things down a notch or two just so that WinAmp gets the cpu
attention
| it needs to avoid jerky playback. Heck, right now I only have
Thunderbird,
| XNews, TMPEGEnc, and WinAmp running and my XP2400+ is running at
100%
| and will stay that way at least until the video I am reencoding is
| done - in another 193 minutes.
|
| And actually, I don't have a word processor - I just use the
| editor in the IDE for whatever compiler I happen to have open.
| Compiling apps and doing a little related database work can very
| easily leave WinAmp starved for cpu cycles - on a 1.8 GHz Opteron
| dualie. I also know a few people who do CAD work who find it very
| difficult to get decent audio playback while they work - even though
| they typically have a fast Xeon or Opteron dualie.
|
| Who has got cpu cycles left for games ?


You're one brave puppy to change priority for any application to
"realtime" as this may crash your OS.

Not likely. If the application only takes 35% of the CPU to run, switching
it to real time won't make any more demands. It will give priority to the
application so while it only uses 35% of the CPU cycles, it will be the
first 35%. The rest will have to wait and appear sluggish.

Now if you run SETI and give it realtime priority, it'll make so many
demands on the CPU that nothing else will run ! The system won't crash, it
just won't be able to keep/catch up. You will have to reboot the system to
get control back but you can still do that without crashing if you have
enough patience.